FAA says low-flying plane over Staten Island is 'pre-planned' flight to take photos

[Mister K]

Source: Silive.com

A plane, that appears to be a commercial jet tailed by fighter jets, is a "pre-planned" military flight taking photos of the Statue of Liberty, according to the Federal Aviation Administration.

Reports from some eyewitnesses indicate it may be Air Force One.

"It is pre-planned, pre-coordinated with everyone involved," said FAA spokesman Jim Peters. "It's a military flight over New York to take photos."

Peters, who stressed it is not an emergency, said the flight is circling the Statue of Liberty and New York City to take photos.




Read more: http://www.silive.com/news/index.ssf/2009/04/faa_says_lowflying_plane_over.html

---

Maybe next time some morons can warn the people before causing most of Downtown Manhattan and Jersey city to evacuate.

[Adelante]

1. Did JC and Downtown Manhattan evacuate?

Local authorities were apparently briefed in advance, apparently.

Peters said city officials as well as state government agencies in New York and New Jersey were briefed on the flight in advance.

[Mister K]

5. Not officially

It was not 'official' but there were a lot of people outside on the street.

[KoKo]

16. "The Government's Rotten Explanation For Terrorizing NYC" / UPDATE

The Government's Rotten Explanation For Terrorizing NYC
Joe Weisenthal|Apr. 27, 2009, 12:32 PM|comment17
Print
Tags: New York, Terrorism

The FAA says the jumbo jet flying low over Manhattan this morning was "photo op" -- something having to do with the branch of the military that takes care of Air Force One.

However if you read the account from the WSJ -- which got the official statements -- you'll see that none of it makes any sense.

Sections like this are particularly unhelpful:

In a written statement Monday, the Air Force confirmed that an "aerial photo mission" had been carried out Monday in the area of New York City by the Presidential Airlift Group, which is described on the White House Web site as being part of the White House Military Office and responsible for maintaining and operating Air Force One. The Air Force statement described the mission has having been carried out in coordination with the FAA. The FAA referred additional questions about the matter to the U.S. Air Force.

"This mission, involving the VC-25 and an F-16, was conducted in conjunction with normally scheduled continuation training for assigned aircrew members," the Air Force statement said. "This mission was coordinated for the Upper New York Bay, south of the Holland Tunnel and in the Newark Bay north of the Staten Island Expressway between the hours of 1000L and 1030L."

We're not 100% sure, but the English translation is: "Oh crap, we really screwed up, so we're going say a bunch of words without saying anything."

Here's more ass-covering from the NYT:

Jim Peters, a spokesman for the Federal Aviation Administration, said “the photo op was approved and coordinated with everyone.” Notification was made in advance to the mayor’s office, “including its 911 and 311 operation centers,” the New York City Police Department, the New Jersey State Police, the United States Park Police and other agencies, he said.

Later on Monday morning, the Police Department acknowledged that it had been notified about the event but said it had been barred from alerting the public. “The flight of a VC-25 aircraft and F-16 fighters this morning was authorized by the F.A.A. for the vicinity of the Statue of Liberty with directives to local authorities not to disclose information about it but to direct any inquiries to the F.A.A. Air Traffic Security Coordinator,” the Police Department said in a statement.

What!? So everyone in the government knew that a jumbo jet would be weaving in between skyscrapers this morning, but they were barred from alerting the public? Um, why? Were they afraid office workers were going to open their window and shoot spitballs at the plane?

Did they really think that the uninformed public would simply look up, see a plane and not evacuate their offices in a panic?

The bottom line here is that there was either a) a massive communication failure or b) a massive error in judgment. The most charitable interpretation of the government's obfuscation is that they're covering for someone's professional error.

Unless there's a really good explanation, that person probably deserves to be fired. Now, we just need to figure out who it is.
http://www.businessinsider.com/the-governments-rotten-explanation-for-terrorizing-nyc-2009-4

[Bacchus39]

21. government of the people, hey?

but the people don't really need to know I guess.

[No Elephants]

32. Yet, Bloomberg, Mayor of NYC, says he wasn't notified.

[LakeSamish706]

2. It would have been kind of nice if they had pre warned everyone.... read this OP...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x5543020

[soleft]

3. Several years ago during fleet week a similar thing happend

A crop duster spewing smoke flew up the east river followed by F 16's - I nearly had a heart attack.

[Tracer]

4. You need a commercial plane and fighter jets? ...

... to take photos of the Statue of Liberty?


Seems like a helicopter would do perfectly well.

[Ian David]

6. Not if you want the fighter planes in the foreground of the shot.

Could be anything from an Air Force recruiting commercial, to an industrial video for the aerospace industry, to an IMAX film, to footage for a ride at Disney World.

[Sen. Walter Sobchak]

23. Soarin' at Epcot is getting its own movie

The Soarin' Over California film at Epcot is only temporary - a globally themed one is being made for Disney World.

[No Elephants]

36. Or Photoshop.

[Rebubula]

7. Side Note...

...I HATE the phrase 'pre-planned'....the word 'plan' implies 'PRE'

Sorry...sort of a grammar nazi...

[14thColony]

8. Good point

[14thColony]

9. ...

*hit Post button twice*

[No Elephants]

33. Irony = double posting when commenting upon redundancy.

[aquart]

10. No, I'm with you on this.

[VWolf]

11. Nah

They planned it before they planned it :)

[No Elephants]

14. That's a usage error, though, not a grammar error.. (Sorry.)

[Berry Cool]

24. If you think that's bad

how about "pre-prepared"?

I see that a lot.

[No Elephants]

30. Advance notice? Lots and lots of repetitious redundancies all over the place...everywhere!

(Yes, I did that on purpose!)

[sabra]

12. 747, F-16s fly over lower NYC causing scare (federal government exercise)

Source: MSNBC

Hundreds fled one building where employee said no warning was provided

NEW YORK - A federal government exercise Monday involving low-flying planes created a panic in New York City and parts of New Jersey.

Two fighter jets escorted a low-flying Boeing 747 over lower Manhattan as part of a photo shoot.

That's the same part of the city where hijacked passenger jets crashed into the World Trade Center on Sept. 11, 2001.

John Leitner, a trader at the New York Mercantile Exchange building, said people began running outside when they saw the planes around 10 a.m. ET.

...

The Federal Aviation Administration said it had advance notice of the event and had notified local officials ahead of time.

"They were making two, maybe three passes," FAA spokesman Jim Peters told NBC affiliate WNBC. "The DOD (Department of Defense) and the FAA worked this all out in advance."

Read more: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/30435336/

[Sequoia]

13. I may never ZO-O-O-OM on the enemy but I'm in the Lord's army!

For some reason that Sunday School song popped in my head.

[ohio2007]

19. Is that supposed to look like Airforce One?

Video of Air Force Airplane "Photo-Op" That Caused Panic in New York City and Jersey City

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BMoy8JprKI0&feature=player_embedded

the president's plane is missing...
who signed off on this ?

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/30438822#30438822
New Yorkers are pissed

[Thothmes]

20. Yes, it is one of several aircraft that becomes Air Force One

when the President is on board.

[No Elephants]

15. The geniuses who knew about this could not give notice?

[Mister K]

17. LETTER FROM NYC COUNCIL TO FAA:

LETTER FROM NYC COUNCIL TO FAA:

Lynne A. Osmus

Acting Administrator

Federal Aviation Administration

800 Independence Avenue Southwest

Room 1010

Washington D.C. 20591

Dear Ms. Osmus:

New Yorkers were surprised to see a low-flying aircraft trailed by two fighter planes near lower Manhattan this morning, and even more surprised to hear that it had been authorized by the FAA.

This aerial mission which took place without any prior notice to most New Yorkers caused unnecessary fear, and forced thousands to evacuate their buildings in both New York and New Jersey. In light of the heightened sensitivity to low-flying commercial planes in the New York City area, we would expect that the FAA would not allow military aircraft to accompany what appeared to be a commercial jet unless there was a pressing military need.

To the contrary, the mission has been described alternately as a "photo op" and an "aerial photo mission," neither of which would have prevented advance notice to the public. It is our further understanding that The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, which operates our bridges, tunnels and airports, also had no advance knowledge of the mission.

Because they were caught off guard, workers at the New York Mercantile Exchange, Goldman Sachs, Merrill Lynch, and other institutions evacuated their buildings, and hundreds of others called 911 when they saw the low-flying plane. Thousands of people filled the streets in lower Manhattan, fearing the worst. If we had had advance warning, we could have advised our constituents not to be alarmed, and minimized the high level of concern that existed this morning.

We understand that there is a need to conduct military activity and even, under some circumstances, near lower Manhattan. However, this does not appear to have been a serious military exercise that would have required a "need to know" classification. Additionally, if this was indeed an aerial photo mission, why you would approve such an exercise for a Monday morning defies reason.

We ask that you urgently advise New Yorkers of the purpose of this exercise, why it needed to be undertaken in New York, and without any public notice. We also ask that you commit to considerable public advance warning before undertaking similar activities in the future.

Sincerely yours,



Daniel R. Garodnick

[magellan]

18. This was a crappy thing to do to NYers

With all the incredible sfx technology available today, there was zero reason to do this on location if they couldn't notify the populace beforehand. There's simply no excuse.

Whatever numb-nut(s) is responsible has something to answer for.

[Sen. Walter Sobchak]

22. I have a better idea

People can stop being so paranoid and not freak out at airplanes flying over a large city in the industrialized world.

[magellan]

25. Tell that to the people who were traumatized by 9/11

It's real easy to say quit being so paranoid, but not everyone is as tough as you seem to suggest you are.

[NYC_SKP]

26. Not everyone was freaked out by this. But the MSM loves to play it up.

There are a number of youtube videos showing public reactions, not all of them are freaking out.

Interestingly, one with people freaking out is down at Battery Park.

Battery Park is most likely populated by tourists, not natives.

But of course, the media is going to play up the freaked out tourist thing.

This was a bad idea, but it wasn't that much drama.

:patriot:

[magellan]

27. From what I'm reading/seeing, there was reason to freak out

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BMoy8JprKI0

That video shows how low the jet was flying over commercial buildings (not sure if that's lower Manhattan or Jersey City; reports are similar from both places).

I live not far from Orlando Int'l where we get some real squeakers now and then on approach or take-off, but we're used to it. However, if I worked in that part of the NY metro area and saw a jetliner escorted by fighter jets flying that low towards my building, I'd freak out too.

It wasn't simply a bad idea. This shows a serious lack of sensitivity on the part of all who planned and took part in it.

[No Elephants]

31. Battery Park is near Ground Zero. Lots of offices in that area, not only tourists.

[Sen. Walter Sobchak]

28. I would be delighted to,

Aircraft fly over populated areas - if your first reaction is terra, well yeah... get over it.

9/11 happened for one reason and one reason only, airline policy was to cooperate with hijackers, now the policy is keep the cockpit door locked. If they want to kill everybody in the back, well alright then - but they won't be crashing the plane into any buildings.

[Trajan]

29. You do not speak for everyone ...

Frankly, I will permit the good people of New York to use their own judgment about the propriety of this event ....

Some can be so smug about such things, when they live hundreds or perhaps thousands of miles away in their dirt hovel ....

Even disregarding the imminence of a possible terror attack using a jetliner, FAA regulations do NOT normally permit such low flying, and
citizens would be alarmed by the mere presence of such a craft at that altitude anywhere near the city itself.

There are reasons for those regulations, including any space required for recovery from a flight anomaly .... I believe that regulations
require a minimum altitude of at least 1500', if not more for that particular corridor ...

Smart and prudent people know 'anything can happen' and adjust their behavior accordingly to reduce the risk to innocent people ....

So the 'get over it' BS is simply smug, condescending nonsense ... an insult to reasonable people with a reasonable gripe ...

[magellan]

37. This low? And with a fighter jet escort?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BMoy8JprKI0

I'm sure the policy of keeping the cockpit door locked was a great comfort to the people watching this from the ground. /sarcasm

[No Elephants]

34. Flying low is the point, not flying over. Planes fly over NYC 24/7/365.

[No Elephants]

35. They need to explain the real need for those photos, if any..

[surrealAmerican]

39. Really. Just how much do the taxpayers have to spend ...

... for what are very likely advertising photos?

[goforit]

38. What a huge waste of money!! if it is a photo-op. Or a set-up by rigging the plane.